Folks, I often wondered what possessed Judge Carter in California to tell the world he wanted to try this case on its merits and then do a sudden 180 by dismissing the case with prejudice? Does the word arrogance come to mind? Did the justice system in California just reach the bottom of the barrel? The performance of Judge Carter was totally disgusting to watch.. Oh, and this whoop-ti-do you heard from folks that Carter would do the right thing because he is an EX-Marine.. what happened? Did honor and his oath get flushed on the way to the bench?

I went back and read some of Carters words and was stunned by his lack of knowledge of the Constitution or even a basic understanding of what is really going on here.

“Parents cannot renounce U.S. citizenship on behalf of their minor children. Before an oath of renunciation will be administered under Section 349(a)(5) of the INA, a person under the age of eighteen must convince a U.S. diplomatic or consular officer that he/she fully understands the nature and consequences of the oath of renunciation, is not subject to duress or undue influence, and is voluntarily seeking to renounce his/her U.S. citizenship.”

exactly Beckwith!! This is SO arranged. Bauer, the clerk, it all fits!! America is facing a HUGE conspiracy. One that they have never experience before. yeah, there has been shenanigans before but everything PALES in comparison to this situation. You are actually under attack right now America has NO choice but to rise up and physically remove these criminal thugs. That is what they really are - THUGS. They are so high on themselves right now they don’t think that they can fail. The only thing that can’t happen is that America thinks they can overturn them at the next election. Too late!! Far too late. The time is NOW. You realize he is building and arming a “personal” army of street thugs right now. All the while he is weakening the military. It very soon will not be a fair fight. VERY soon. If I sound “out there” just watch”!! CO

109
posted on 01/01/2010 9:25:41 PM PST
by Canadian Outrage
(Conservatism is to a country what medicine is to a wound - HEALING!!)

Your right except that Nancy PELOUSI signed the forms as if they information were true. There is a whole lot of blame to go around here but that does NOT exempt Obama from being a FRAUD and a USURPER. All I can say is what balls. What arrogance. Also there is far more behind this than just the congress and Senate. America has been invaded already they just don’t know it yet. They will soon. CO

115
posted on 01/01/2010 9:43:44 PM PST
by Canadian Outrage
(Conservatism is to a country what medicine is to a wound - HEALING!!)

Judge Carter is an idiot. He must know that Obama does not qualify under Article II of the constitution. And he thinks
that George Bush woukld leave the country defenceless? Dubyah would be president again until a new election was held to replace our “designer” so called president. The romantic notion of a first “black” president blinded everyone, including Carter, who is not upholding the constitution as he is sworn to do. Carter is therefore impeachable.

Their I.Q.s are at display here in the open, when a few of them says that when you immigrate to a foreign country, you DON'T follow that country's laws, but you still only have to follow U.S. laws, hello!!!

I fail to understand how your answer pertains to Indonesian law, so I'll just assume that you couldn't.

Sorry, wrong post. My mistake.

The answer is no, I cannot. Indonesian law can no more supersede U.S. law than U.S. law can supersede Indonesian. If Obama did obtain Indonesian citizenship as a child that did not strip him of his U.S. citizenship. And if Indonesian law had forbidden dual citizenship then it would have been the Indonesian citizenship that was invalid. And nothing in their law could change that.

But I will point out that the Indonesian citizenship laws in effect at the time Obama lived there do not forbid dual citizenship and most likely would not have granted Obama citizenship even if he was formally adopted by Soetoro at the time. So your argument is flawed to begin with. Law on the Citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia

My Father-in-law came here from Holland in 1947 and he had to give up his Dutch citizenship. My brother came here in 1950 and he had to give up his Danish citizenship!!

That's right, because in order to become a naturalized citizen you are required to voluntarily give up your citizenship. Had your father-in-law or your brother been born here while on a visit to the U.S. then they would have acquired U.S. citizenship and there is nothing that Holland or Denmark could do to prevent it. Likewise, they no doubt would also have been citizens of Holland and Denmark, and there is nothing that the U.S. could do to prevent that. And said U.S. citizenship would continue until they were adults and they voluntarily gave it up.

In retrospect I think that this conversation between us should go into the F.R. "Hall of Shame" as evidence of crass Birther foolishness.

I certainly agree there is a great deal of blame to go around where out and out fraud upon us Americans took place. I believe they all knew Obama did not constitutionally qualify to be President and committed fraud in declaring that he was.

I respect all the attorneys who are trying to get to the truth, but especially follow the work of Leo and Steve as I believe they are taking the steps that will finally get the truth out in the open. And they will uphold the laws of our land and the constitution every step of the way. God Bless them!

" I think thats one thing people fail to grasp. The Republic of Vanuatu could pass a law declaring every member of FR its citizens, and that would not mean we relinquish our original citizenships.

"No, but it would mean you relinquish your original citizenship if you subsequently apply for a Vanatuan passport."

I would think it's obvious. The Republic of Vanauatu could pass a law declaring every member of FR its citizens, and it would have no effect unless and until you decided to take action upon that declaration and apply for a Vanuatan passport. Your action (and their acceptance of your application) would be a de facto renunciation of your US citizenship under the sections of the USC already quoted.

"Section 349 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1481), as amended, states that U.S. citizens are subject to loss of citizenship if they perform certain specified acts voluntarily and with the intention to relinquish U.S. citizenship. Briefly stated, these acts include:

1. obtaining naturalization in a foreign state (Sec. 349 (a) (1) INA); 2. taking an oath, affirmation or other formal declaration to a foreign state or its political subdivisions (Sec. 349 (a) (2) INA);"

The acceptance of a Vanuatuan passport woluld be prima facie evidence for the relinquishment of US citizenship, in that you'd have to perform one of the other of these two conditions (most likely the second, as Vanuatu would already have naturalized you with your permission). The application for the Vanuatuan passport would show a positive intention to relinquish US citizenship.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.